"Are you really?" said Hermione. "I know all about you, of course - I got a few extra books for background reading, and you're in Modern Magical History and The Rise and Fall of the Dark Arts and Great Wizarding Events of the Twentieth Century.

We know from Harry's shopping list that A History of Magic was a required text for first year students (SS, Ch. 5, p. 66). Since Hermione mentioned only extra books for background reading from which she learned all about Harry (and, likely, Voldemort), it would have been unlikely that A History of Magic included Voldemort's fall to Harry, and possibly Voldemort at all. But Hermione's comment in DH clarifies that nothing about Voldemort would have been covered.

Makes me wonder, though, why Hermione didn't look towards A History of Magic to find Nicolas Flamel during the trio's search in SS. It seems unlikely Flamel wouldn't be included in the comprehensive history text pre-nineteenth century, though perhaps it predated her consideration (1300s/early 1400s, though we know she did consider events in the 14th century [Wizard's Council in the 14th century headed by Burdock Muldoon (Fantastic Beasts)]). Given Hermione's commitment of her books to memory, though, perhaps it wasn't there, or else the trio was overly fixated on recent events.

That certainly clears that up, thank you !

__________________
the days may go , the years pass, but Potter will always be in my heart.
Pottermore: Wingdawn148
Wand: sycamore core: Phoenix
surprisingly swishy

On many accounts it was mentioned that Voldemort was the greatest Leglimens the world had ever seen, particularly by Severus Snape during OotF and to Bellatrix Lestrange in the beginning of HBP.

However, Snape was able to successfully block his true intentions while in the company of Voldemort, and on one occasion even met Voldemort's direct gaze when being questioned.

Was Severus Snape, therefore, the most accomplished Occlumens of all time?

We have no way to measure just how good either was . My personal take is that Voldemort wasn't as good as his reputation . Snape was very good but he could be beaten . We know that Harry managed to get into Snape's inner thoughts so if Harry could do it but Voldemort couldn't then maybe Voldemort was not the best at it .

We have no way to measure just how good either was . My personal take is that Voldemort wasn't as good as his reputation . Snape was very good but he could be beaten . We know that Harry managed to get into Snape's inner thoughts so if Harry could do it but Voldemort couldn't then maybe Voldemort was not the best at it .

I haven't read that scene recently, but I suspect Snape wasn't prepared for Harry's accidental assault.

We know that Harry managed to get into Snape's inner thoughts so if Harry could do it but Voldemort couldn't then maybe Voldemort was not the best at it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by snapes_witch

I haven't read that scene recently, but I suspect Snape wasn't prepared for Harry's accidental assault.

In the book, it came about as a result of Harry's use of Protego, didn't it? There are a few cases in the series where Harry manages some unusual magic as a result of some coincidental timing or alignment, as opposed to training and intent. One of the difficulties in assessing Harry's magical skills (say, as compared with Hermione) is in figuring out how much of this is innate talent, and how much is just dumb luck. It often seems like the latter, but I have trouble believing that Rowling would spend so many years writing about a hero whose primary positive magical ability is that he was that lucky.

__________________
If you've got a moment, why not try out the FORT Sorting Quiz? Now in New and Improved v2.0!

Of all time. I don't think so. Surely there must have been witches and wizards who were very accomplished Occlumens over the ages. But there is no doubt in my mind that Snape was among the very best of them.

Snape was definitely better than Voldemort in Occlumency. Was he the best of his time? Probably, but I'm not sure. There was Dumbledore and then there are Unspeakables may have had training in Occlumency and there surely would be others in the WW who could have been accomplished Occlumens to match Snape. In Hogwarts, the Order and among the Death Eaters though, I think the only person who might have have been better than Snape is Dumbledore.

__________________The man who, in my opinion, won the war against Voldemort for Harry Potter and the Light! Severus Snape!

There is nothing of which every man is so afraid, as getting to know how enormously much he is capable of doing and becoming - Soren Kierkegaard

Wizards are extraordinary creatures, but wizards however are like humans with magical gifts. To help understand lets compare, if you will, the athlete. The most excellent player in a particular sport would be the best at his or her position by way of talent. Logical parameters such as, vigor, prosperity, convention, and countless more, have even weakened the best of players in their respected sport. Can it not be argued a wizard on an off day is not the best legilmens or occlumence at all times of every day, because of feelings of the heart, despondency or a certain empiricism that may affect each wizard differently. For example, Voldemort was most dark wizard in recent times,. but because of his fear of death, the lack of love in his life, his above average drive to hurt others than to find friends and his fierce reputation, his followers would not dare question his action or motives, no matter how impertinent their rationale was. This tenacity, ultimately lead to his miscalculation and demise.

Even Iron Mike Tyson got knocked OUT at his supposed peak!!
PATS beat by lowely Giants Twice in Superbowls, one time PATS WERE UNDEFEATED and GIANTS were 9-7! !
Yankees vs RedSox, Redsox down 3 games and came back in the 2004 World Series to beat the Yankees!

You make some good points ,on any given day Voldemort could have a bad day or not be at his best . However I believe that if you take an average of his abilities over an extended period, you will find that he truly was as bad-*** as he was made out to be.